<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" dtd-version="3.0">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">BG</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Biogeosciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">BG</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Biogeosciences</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1726-4189</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/bg-15-1161-2018</article-id><title-group><article-title>Antagonistic effects of drought and sand burial enable the survival of the biocrust moss <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> in an arid sandy desert</article-title>
      </title-group><?xmltex \runningtitle{Antagonistic effects of drought and sand burial enable the survival of
\textit{B.~argenteum}}?><?xmltex \runningauthor{R.~Jia et al.}?>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Jia</surname><given-names>Rongliang</given-names></name>
          <email>rongliangjia@163.com</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Zhao</surname><given-names>Yun</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Gao</surname><given-names>Yanhong</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Hui</surname><given-names>Rong</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Yang</surname><given-names>Haotian</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Wang</surname><given-names>Zenru</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff2">
          <name><surname>Li</surname><given-names>Yixuan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Shapotou Desert Research and Experiment Station, Northwest Institute of Eco-Environment and Resources, <?xmltex \hack{\newline}?> Chinese Academy of Sciences, 320 Donggang West Road, Lanzhou 730000, China</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Agronomy College, Agricultural University of Shenyang, Shenyang 110866, China</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Rongliang Jia (rongliangjia@163.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>23</day><month>February</month><year>2018</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>15</volume>
      <issue>4</issue>
      <fpage>1161</fpage><lpage>1172</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>22</day><month>September</month><year>2017</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>25</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>24</day><month>January</month><year>2018</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>1</day><month>November</month><year>2017</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        
        
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018.html">This article is available from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract>
    <p id="d1e144">Biocrust moss is an essential soil surface bio-cover. It can represent the
latest succession stage among the diverse range of surface-dwelling
cryptogams (e.g., cyanobacteria, green algae, and lichen, which are also
referred to as biocrusts), and it can make a major contribution to soil
stability and fertility in many arid sandy desert ecosystems. The soil
surface represents a very large ecological niche that is poikilohydric in
nature. Biocrust moss is therefore highly susceptible to drought and sand
burial, which are two ubiquitous stressors in arid sandy deserts. However,
little information is available regarding the mechanism by which biocrust
moss can survive and flourish in these habitats when stressed simultaneously
by the two stressors. The combined effects of drought and sand burial were
evaluated in a field experiment using the predominant biocrust moss,
<italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw., in the Tengger Desert, China. Drought was
simulated by applying distilled water in three artificial rainfall regimes at
8-day intervals in spring and autumn: 4 and 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (average rainfall,
control), 2 and 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (double drought), and 1 and 1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
(4-fold drought), respectively. The effect of sand burial was determined by
applying six treatments, i.e., sand depths of 0 (control), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and
10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>. The four parameters of chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and shoot upgrowth were
evaluated in the moss. It was found that the combined effects of drought and
sand burial did not exacerbate the single negative effects of the four
parameters tested. Drought significantly ameliorated the negative effects of
deep-sand burial on the retention of chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, and the regeneration potential of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic>. Sand burial diminished and even reversed the negative
effects of drought on the maintenance of chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, and regeneration potential. Although drought and
sand burial imposed an additive negative effect on shoot upgrowth, which
suggested a trade-off between growth ability and stress tolerance, their
mutually antagonistic effect on the physiological vigor of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> provided an opportunity for the biocrust moss to
overcome the two co-occurring stressors. In addition to providing a strong
stress tolerance, drought and sand burial may provide an important mechanism
for the biodiversity maintenance of biocrust mosses in arid sandy ecosystems.</p>
  </abstract>
    </article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d1e213">Drought is the most common stressor constraining biological activity in
dryland ecosystems (Whitford, 2002; Huxman et al., 2004). The predicted
increase in the frequency and severity of droughts is likely to generate more
profound consequences for community structure and ecosystem functioning in
arid and semiarid ecosystems (IPCC, 2007; Smith, 2011; Weber et al., 2016).
In arid sandy ecosystems, drought generally occurs alongside another
ubiquitous disturbance, sand burial, due to the lowering of the threshold
friction velocities of the upper soil surface (Belnap and Gillette, 1998; Li,
2012). Sand burial can alter various physical factors such as moisture,
temperature, aeration, and other aspects of the plant and soil
microenvironment. It can therefore act as a filter eliminating sensitive
species, and it plays a significant role in determining the composition and
distribution of desert vegetation (Maun, 1998, 2008). Therefore, in habitats
stressed simultaneously by drought and sand burial (e.g., arid desert
ecosystems) throughout China and worldwide, the growth and distribution of
plants is expected to be limited. This is evidenced by mobile sand dunes,
with negligible vegetation cover as an extreme example.</p>
      <p id="d1e216">Biocrust moss is an essential soil surface bio-cover. It can represent the
latest succession stage among the diverse range of surface-dwelling
cryptogams (e.g., cyanobacteria, green algae, and lichen, which are also
referred to as biocrusts) and make a major contribution to soil stability and
fertility in many arid and semiarid sandy desert ecosystems (Weber et al.,
2016). The colonization and development of moss on the surface of a sand dune
is an important biomarker denoting the ecosystem as being stable and healthy
(Zhang et al., 2010). Thus, the assessment, protection, and utilization of
moss is a major management priority in desert regions (Stark et al., 2004;
Barker et al., 2005; Xu et al., 2009; Doherty et al., 2015).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F1" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e221">Main landscapes of the Shapotou region at the
southeastern edge of the Tengger Desert. As a pioneer species, <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. has colonized and flourishes on the soil surface of the
revegetation area <bold>(a)</bold>; this was
achieved by controlling burial stress through the combined application of wind barriers and straw checkerboards and the planting of
shrubs without irrigation <bold>(b)</bold>; 60 years ago, the area was characterized by shifting sand
dunes <bold>(c)</bold>.</p></caption>
        <?xmltex \igopts{width=441.017717pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018-f01.jpg"/>

      </fig>

      <p id="d1e242">Since the 1950s, large-scale construction and land restoration has occurred throughout the arid and semiarid sandy areas of north
China, with the aims of inhibiting the harmful effects of mobile sand movement and recovering degraded ecosystems. One striking success
has been the Shapotou revegetation system, which was constructed to alleviate burial stress using combined applications of wind
barriers, straw checkerboards, and planting anti-drought shrubs without irrigation (Li et al., 2004, as shown in Fig. 1). Sixty years
later, along with the succession of vegetation, biocrust biota have gradually colonized the area and now thrive on the previously bare
soil surface, where they constitute more than 90 % of the living ground cover. As a pioneer moss species, <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic>
Hedw. dominates the soil surface in this system, with a coverage exceeding 70 % and making a major contribution to soil stability
and fertility. Its role is particularly important in areas where the sand-binding role of previously planted shrubs has weakened with
time (Li et al., 2004). This phenomenon is evident throughout other sandy desert ecosystems restored by similar methods in China, where
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> usually appears as the pioneer moss species. Consequently, it needs to be understood why <italic>B. argenteum</italic>
can survive and thrive in ecosystems stressed by both drought and sand burial, enabling it to be the pioneer species.</p>
      <p id="d1e255">Species that are poikilohydric in nature lack vascular support tissues but
usually protrude above the soil surface to receive light for photosynthesis.
Also, they are completely immobile, which prevents them from finding refuge
to avoid drought stresses (Garcia-Pichel and Belnap, 1996). <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> responds negatively to drought, despite its high desiccation
tolerance (e.g., Li et al., 2014). Because it grows on the surface,
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> is inevitably exposed to repeated sand burial of
various depths. Due to its limited height above the ground surface (1 to
25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) the moss can be completely buried even when the burial depth
is shallow (Jia et al., 2008). This has generated multiple organic horizons
of “fossilized mosses” in areas where it has survived burial stress and
barren spaces where it has not (Jia et al., 2008). Therefore, there must be
a mechanism for <italic>B. argenteum</italic> to adapt to and survive this
combination of stressors, although it remains poorly understood. A clear
understanding of the mechanism enabling <italic>B. argenteum</italic> to survive the
co-occurring drought and sand burial stressors in desert areas would help to
explain the distribution mechanisms of this common species. It would also
enable us to predict the consequences of climate change and to formulate
management policies and restoration practices using biocrust moss to
stabilize and rehabilitate degraded flowing sandy dunes.</p>
      <p id="d1e277">Previous studies have principally focused on the individual effects of
drought (Stark et al., 2004; Barker et al., 2005; Xu et al., 2009) and sand
burial (Jia et al., 2008) as stressors on desert biocrust mosses, with little
emphasis on their combination and even less on their interaction. Considering
the different and even contrasting effects of drought and sand burial on
physiology and growth, it is of interest to determine if a combination of
drought and sand burial imposes a mutually antagonistic effect on the
physiology and growth of <italic>B. argenteum</italic>, enabling it to survive the
two co-occurring stressors. Drought is reported to protect moss from heat
shock (Xu et al., 2009) and ultraviolet-B-induced damage (Turnbull et al.,
2009), while sand burial has been reported to slow water loss from moss
crusts (Meng et al., 2011). Therefore, our initial hypothesis is that the
combination of drought and sand burial has a mutually antagonistic effect on
the physiology, regeneration, and growth of <italic>B. argenteum</italic>. To test
this hypothesis, multiple assessments of the single and combined effects of
drought and sand burial stresses were made, including measurements of the
chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII fluorescence, regeneration potential, and
growth rate.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <title>Materials and methods</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <title>Study site</title>
      <p id="d1e304">The study area was located in the southeastern fringe of the Tengger Desert
(37<inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>28<inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> N, 105<inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>00<inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>′</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula> E; elevation
1339 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>). It lies within the transitional zone from desert steppe to
steppified desert and also represents a transitional belt between desert and
oasis. Based on meteorological records from 1956 to 2003, the mean annual
temperature is 10.6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, with the minimum temperature being
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>25.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in January and the maximum being 38.1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C in
July. The mean annual pan potential evaporation is around 3000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>,
while the mean annual precipitation is 180.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, more than half of
which falls in summer (June–August). The other three seasons typically
experience more drought periods. The landscape of the study region consisted
of large and dense reticulate barchan chains of sand dunes, where the
predominant native plants were <italic>Hedysarum scoparium</italic> Fisch. and
<italic>Agriophyllum squarrosum</italic> Moq. that together covered about 1 % of
the ground surface. No biocrust was found on the surface of the mobile sand
dunes (Li, 2012).</p>
      <p id="d1e406">A no-irrigation vegetation system was established in 1956 to protect the
Baotou–Lanzhou railway line from sand burial. It consisted of straw
checkerboards as sand barriers to fix shifting dunes, with the subsequent
planting of xerophytic shrub seedlings (<italic>Caragana korshinskii</italic>,
<italic>Artemisia ordosica</italic>, <italic>Calligonum arborescens</italic>, etc.). The
system was further expanded in 1964, 1981, and 1987. These vegetated areas
were distributed parallel to the railway line, with a length of 16 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
and a width of 1–2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (Li et al., 2004). The initial shrub
vegetation was gradually replaced by communities dominated by herbaceous
plants due to the decreasing soil water content in the upper soil layers (Li
et al., 2004). Biocrust biota then colonized and developed on the stabilized
dunes, which resulted in the surface becoming increasingly stabilized. As
a pioneer species, <italic>B. argenteum</italic> successfully colonized the
revegetated area and became widespread, with a coverage exceeding 70 % on
windward slopes and low-lying sand dunes. Although there is a gradual
reduction in sand burial stress on the growth of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> as the
biocrust moss becomes established, it is inevitably exposed to repeated
wind-blown sand events, leading to dust burial of various depths. This burial
is typically caused by two different processes that are seasonal in their
severity. In spring, when the wind speed is usually the highest and drought
is most severe (precipitation is the lowest), burial by wind-blown sand
predominates. In summer and autumn, when the drought is slightly alleviated
by higher levels of precipitation, animal activity (burrowing by ants,
lizards, and rabbits) becomes important.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <title>Sampling and treatments</title>
      <p id="d1e445">Samples of intact moss crusts (85 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> thick) with
100 % coverage of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> were randomly collected using
cylindrical PVC dishes (104 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> diameter, 12 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> height). At
the base of each dish there was a drainage outlet that was covered with
strips of nylon mesh to allow excess water to be removed, while preventing
the loss of sand. All samples were collected from the interspaces between
shrubs in the revegetated area that was established in 1981 and transferred
to the Water Balance Observation Site (about 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">km</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> from the sampling
site) at Shapotou Desert Research and Experiment Station, Chinese Academy of
Sciences. Sampling was conducted in late February and late August, which was
about 10 days before the experiments began in spring and autumn in 2013,
respectively. Samples were gently processed and sprayed with distilled water
to ensure that they were moist and that the sample structure remained intact.
All samples were placed below the ground surface, with the top 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
left aboveground. Rain shelters were then placed at a height of 2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
above the samples. The soil surfaces surrounding the samples were paved with
a straw curtain, which extended for 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> beyond the shade of the
shelters to prevent disturbance from sand particles outside the study area.</p>
      <p id="d1e512">Both drought and sand burial stress treatments were conducted from 10 March
(spring) and 1 September (autumn). A total of 108 samples were collected for
each experiment in the two different seasons and were randomly divided into
three water supply groups by applying distilled water in three artificial
rainfall regimes at 8-day intervals in spring and autumn: 4 and 6 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
(average rainfall, control), 2 and 3 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (double drought), and 1 and
1.5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (4-fold drought), respectively. To determine the effect of
burial, six treatments were applied, with depths of 0 (control), 0.5, 1, 2,
4, and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M34" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>, equivalent to 0, 4.25, 8.5, 17, 34, and 85 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mL</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
of dried sand, respectively. The sand was distributed gently and evenly over
crusts that had been subjected to each of the water supply subgroups
described above.</p>
      <p id="d1e550">There were six replicates of the drought<inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>sand burial treatment. The
prescribed sand burial depths and quantities of water applied were selected
based on actual sand burial depths and precipitation levels observed during
the period of 1990–2010 (Li et al., 2012) in the study area. The duration of
each experiment was 72 days.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Measurements of the chlorophyll~$a$ content, PSII photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and maximal shoot upgrowth}?><title>Measurements of the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and maximal shoot upgrowth</title>
      <p id="d1e574">On the day after each experiment was completed, the sand particles deposited
over the moss were gently blown off, and the same weight of sand applied
prior to the burial treatment was collected. The upper 26 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> (i.e.,
including the active moss rhizoids) and inner core (5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M39" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> diameter)
were excavated from each original sample and placed into cylindrical plastic
dishes (5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> diameter, 28 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> height). Each dish had
a drainage outlet at the bottom that was covered with a strip of nylon mesh
to allow excess moisture to be removed. These smaller samples were more
representative than the original samples because the edge effect of the PVC
tube was removed.</p>
      <p id="d1e605">The six small samples from each treatment were randomly divided into two
subgroups: one for the determination of maximal shoot upgrowth, PSII
photochemical efficiency, and regeneration potential and the other for the
measurement of the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content of <italic>B. argenteum</italic>. The
methods used to measure the maximal shoot upgrowth, PSII photochemical
efficiency, regeneration potential, and chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content of samples
were adopted from Jia et al. (2012).</p>
      <p id="d1e625">The maximal shoot elongation of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> was determined by the difference between the vertical distances from the upper
edge of the PVC container to the uppermost part of the crust surface prior to sand burial and after removal from the sand at the end of
the experiment using a Vernier caliper.</p>
      <p id="d1e631">The samples were watered to saturation level and then cultured in a growth
chamber (Thermoline Scientific Equipment Pty. Ltd, NSW, Australia). The
photon flux density (PFD), air temperature (Ta), relative air humidity (RH),
and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration (Ca) were set to
1000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mmol</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 25 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C, 55 %, and
390 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mmol</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, during the day
(08:00–19:00 UTC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>8), and 0 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mmol</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, 15 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:msup><mml:mi/><mml:mo>∘</mml:mo></mml:msup></mml:math></inline-formula>C,
65 %, and 400 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M51" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mmol</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, at night
(19:00–08:00 UTC<inline-formula><mml:math id="M52" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>8 the next day). The position of each sample was
randomly changed every day. After a 3-day pre-acclimation, the samples were
wetted again to saturation level and PSII photochemical efficiency was
measured 4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> later (when the maximum value occurred). The PSII
photochemical efficiency (Fv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>Fm) was determined by an analysis of the slow
kinetics of chlorophyll fluorescence using a PAM-2000 fluorometer (Walz,
Effeltrich, Germany). The device was adjusted to maintain a distance of
1.20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> between the fiber optics exit plane and sample. Prior to
measurement, the samples were dark adapted for 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> and then
supplemented with a sequence of weak irradiance and saturation pulses
(5000 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mmol</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">s</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
      <p id="d1e838">These samples were then hydrated, washed, and shaken to remove any sand
attached. Then, 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> long portions of the upper shoots containing
stem apices were isolated from each of the smaller samples and placed on
native sand that had previously been sieved and dried as described by Stark
et al. (2004). The same cylindrical plastic dishes as in the previous
experiment were used, and the experimental conditions were also the same,
except that moisture was supplied daily. The protonemal area was determined
according to the protocols described by Barker et al. (2005) after a 58-day
inoculation. The measurement of the regeneration potential of detached shoots
was only conducted in the spring experiment, due to some of the autumn
experiment samples being broken during transportation.</p>
      <p id="d1e848">The chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content was determined on a <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> dry-weight
basis by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) using a method
described by Gilmore and Yamamoto (1991). Briefly, 50 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mg</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> of dry,
soil-free shoots were collected from each sample, ground, extracted in
80 % acetone, and then centrifuged at 10 000 rpm for 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M62" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">min</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.
After the removal of the supernatant, the remaining pellet was resuspended in
100 % acetone and centrifuged again at 10 000 rpm. The supernatants
were then mixed and passed through a 20 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M63" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> filter prior to injection
into a Spherisorb ODS 1 column (Alltech Associates Inc., Deerfield, IL, USA)
at a flow rate of 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M64" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">cm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <title>Statistics</title>
      <p id="d1e910">Three-dimensional plots were produced using MatlabR2014a (The MathWorks Inc.,
Natick, MA, USA) to show the responses of chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M65" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and shoot upgrowth of the
biocrust moss <italic>B. argenteum</italic> to a combination of three levels of
drought severity and six depths of sand burial.</p>
      <p id="d1e923">A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test for any significant
differences in the data using the SPSS 21 software (SPSS Inc., Chicago, USA).
Differences between the individual parameters were evaluated by least
significant difference (LSD) post hoc multiple comparisons at the 95 %
confidence level.</p>
      <p id="d1e926">A detrended correspondence analysis (DCA) of the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential
(protonemal area), and shoot upgrowth of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> was used to determine whether linear or unimodal ordination methods
should be applied. We then performed a redundancy analysis (RDA) to determine the relationships between the parameters listed above and
environmental parameters. A Monte Carlo permutation test (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">499</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) was used to determine the significance of all canonical axes. Both
DCA and RDA were performed using Canoco for windows 5.0 (Ithaca, NY, USA).</p>

<?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><table-wrap id="Ch1.T1"><caption><p id="d1e954">Changes in the percentage cover of <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. within a biocrust in response to sand burial depth in spring and autumn.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="3">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="right"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="right"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Sand burial</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center">Season </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">depth (mm)</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Spring</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Autumn</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100.000</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100.000</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">0.5</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">53.556</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.882</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> c</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M74" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">67.960</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.923</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">1</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">22.667</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.915</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> e</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">28.433</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.308</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> d</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">2</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.667</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.577</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> f</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">4</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M79" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M80" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">10</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M81" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g</oasis:entry>  
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.000</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table><table-wrap-foot><p id="d1e960">Values are means (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M68" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>SE), different letters indicate significant
differences between different sand burial depth treatments at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>
level as determined using an LSD post hoc test; <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>.</p></table-wrap-foot></table-wrap>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Seasonal changes in \textit{B.~argenteum} cover and its response to sand burial depth}?><title>Seasonal changes in <italic>B. argenteum</italic> cover and its response to sand burial depth</title>
      <p id="d1e1253"><italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> can completely cover a soil surface, and there was no significant
difference between spring and autumn cover when sand burial was absent
(Table 1). Sand burial significantly reduced the <italic>B. argenteum</italic> cover in both seasons,
with the amplitude decrease in autumn being significantly lower than that in
spring (Table 1).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F2" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1263">Changes in the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M83" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content of the biocrust moss
<italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. following exposure to natural
precipitation (control; 1), half of the natural precipitation amount (2), and one-fourth of the natural
precipitation amount (4),
combined with 0 (control), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M84" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> depth of sand burial in spring <bold>(a)</bold> and autumn
<bold>(b)</bold>. Symbols represent means <inline-formula><mml:math id="M85" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SE. Different letters indicate significant differences between different drought
severities and sand burial depth treatments at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> level, as determined using an LSD
post hoc test.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F3" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1317">Changes in the PSII photochemical efficiency (Fv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>Fm) of the biocrust
moss <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. following exposure to
natural precipitation (control; 1), half of the natural precipitation amount (2), and one-fourth of the natural precipitation amount
(4), combined with 0 (control), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> depth of sand burial in spring <bold>(a)</bold> and autumn
<bold>(b)</bold>. Symbols represent means <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SE. Different letters indicate significant differences between different drought
severities and sand burial depth treatments at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> level as determined using an LSD post hoc
test.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=441.017717pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on the chlorophyll~$a$ content of \textit{B.~argenteum}}?><title>Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content of <italic>B. argenteum</italic></title>
      <p id="d1e1385">The chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> was generally lower in spring than under the same treatment in autumn, with the
same trend found in the response to drought, sand burial, and their combination (Fig. 2). Drought uniformly imposed negative effects on
the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M93" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, whereas burial by sand had a dual effect on the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content (Fig. 2). The chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>
content increased in treatments when the burial depth was shallow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M96" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and decreased when the depth was larger (sand
burial depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M99" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
      <p id="d1e1454">A significant interactive effect between drought and sand burial on the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> was
found. Drought strengthened the positive effects of shallow burial and mediated the negative effects of deep burial with regard to
chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> retention (Fig. 2). In addition, sand burial weakened and even reversed the negative effects of drought on the
retention of the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content in <italic>B. argenteum</italic> (Fig. 2).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on the PSII photochemical efficiency of \textit{B.~argenteum}}?><title>Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on the PSII photochemical efficiency of <italic>B. argenteum</italic></title>
      <p id="d1e1493">The PSII photochemical efficiency of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> displayed the same trends as the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content in response to
drought, sand burial, and their combination, although it was generally lower in spring than under the same treatment in autumn
(Fig. 3). Drought consistently exerted negative effects on the PSII photochemical efficiency, while burial by sand had a dual effect on
the PSII photochemical efficiency (Fig. 3). The PSII photochemical efficiency increased in treatments where the burial depth was
shallow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and decreased when the depth was larger (sand burial depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
      <p id="d1e1541">A dramatic interactive effect between sand burial and drought on the PSII photochemical efficiency of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> was
observed. Drought strengthened the positive effects of shallow burial and ameliorated the negative effects of deep burial with regard
to PSII photochemical efficiency (Fig. 3). Sand burial diminished and even reversed the negative effects of drought on the retention of
the PSII photochemical efficiency (Fig. 3).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F4" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1549">Changes in the protonemal area of detached shoots of the biocrust
moss <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. following exposure to
natural precipitation (control; 1), half of the natural precipitation amount (2), and one-fourth of the natural precipitation amount (4),
combined with 0 (control), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M108" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> depth of sand burial in spring. Symbols represent
means <inline-formula><mml:math id="M109" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SE. Different letters indicate significant differences between different drought severities and sand burial depth
treatments at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> level as determined using an LSD post hoc test.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=412.564961pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018-f04.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on the regeneration potential of detached shoots of \textit{B.~argenteum}}?><title>Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on the regeneration potential of detached shoots of <italic>B. argenteum</italic></title>
      <p id="d1e1596">Drought imposed negative effects on the regeneration potential of detached
shoots of <italic>B. argenteum</italic>, while burial by sand had a dual effect on
the regeneration potential (Fig. 4). The regeneration potential increased in
treatments where the burial depth was shallow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) and
decreased when the depth was larger (sand burial depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p>
      <p id="d1e1636">There was a remarkable interactive effect of sand burial and drought on the regeneration potential of <italic>B. argenteum</italic>. Sand
burial alleviated and even converted the negative effects of drought into positive effects with regard to the regeneration potential of
detached shoots (Fig. 4). Drought enhanced the positive effects of shallow burial and eased the negative effects of deep burial on the
regeneration potential of detached shoots (Fig. 4).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F5" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1644">Changes in the maximal shoot elongation of the biocrust moss
<italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. following exposure to natural
precipitation (control; 1), half of the natural precipitation amount (2), and one-fourth of the natural precipitation amount (4),
combined with 0 (control), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 10 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> depth of sand burial in spring <bold>(a)</bold> and autumn
<bold>(b)</bold>. Symbols represent means <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mo>±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SE. Different letters indicate significant differences between different drought
severities and sand burial depth treatments at the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> level as determined using an LSD post hoc
test.</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=455.244094pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018-f05.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on shoot elongation of \textit{B.~argenteum}}?><title>Interactive effects of sand burial and drought on shoot elongation of <italic>B. argenteum</italic></title>
      <p id="d1e1699">Although <italic>B. argenteum</italic> shoots were generally less elongated in spring
than under the same treatment in autumn, drought and sand burial had both
negative and dual effects on shoot elongation, which was similar to the
pattern observed for the other three parameters described above (Fig. 5).
Conversely, drought reduced the positive effects of shallow burial and
exacerbated the negative effects of deep burial on shoot upgrowth. In
addition, sand burial aggravated the negative effects of drought on shoot
elongation (Fig. 5).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS6">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Redundancy analysis of the combined effects of sand burial and drought on the chlorophyll~$a$ content, PSII photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and shoot upgrowth of \textit{B.~argenteum}}?><title>Redundancy analysis of the combined effects of sand burial and drought on the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and shoot upgrowth of <italic>B. argenteum</italic></title>
      <p id="d1e1721">The RDA analysis results showed that drought was a more important stressor
influencing shoot elongation than sand burial (Fig. 6), while sand burial
played a more important role in the retention of the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content,
PSII photochemical efficiency, and regeneration potential than drought.
Specifically, sand burial was positively correlated with the chlorophyll
<inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and shoot
elongation when the burial depth was shallow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 6a),
while it was negatively correlated with the four variables when the depth was
larger (sand burial depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M124" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 6b). In addition, drought
was negatively correlated with the four variables when the burial depth was
shallow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 6a) but positively correlated with all
variables, except for shoot elongation, when the depth was larger (sand
burial depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M128" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 6b).</p>
      <p id="d1e1807">The four parameters investigated in this study were more readily affected by
sand burial and drought in autumn than in spring when the burial depth was
shallow (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M129" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 6a). Under deep-sand burial (sand burial
depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M131" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. 6b), the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M133" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, and regeneration potential were more sensitive to
sand burial in autumn than in spring, but shoot elongation was more
susceptible to sand burial in spring than autumn. In contrast, the
chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M134" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content, PSII photochemical efficiency, and regeneration
potential were more sensitive to drought in spring than in autumn, while
shoot elongation was more susceptible to sand burial in autumn than spring
under the deep-sand burial treatments (sand burial depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≥</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>;
Fig. 6b).</p>

      <?xmltex \floatpos{t}?><fig id="Ch1.F6" specific-use="star"><caption><p id="d1e1878">RDA diagram of the effect of drought, sand burial, and their
combination on the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M137" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content,
PSII photochemical efficiency (Fv<inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mo>/</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula>Fm), regeneration potential (protonemal area), and shoot upgrowth (maximal shoot elongation) of
biocrust moss <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. Under a shallow sand burial treatment, the eigenvalues were 0.8134 and 0.0152 for the
first and second axes, respectively, and the correlation coefficients were 0.9527 and 0.4876, respectively. In terms of deep-sand
burial, the eigenvalues of the first and second axes were 0.6068 and 0.2379, respectively, and the correlation coefficients were
0.9362 and 0.9126, respectively. The Monte Carlo permutation test indicates that all variables were significantly correlated with the
environmental factors (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <?xmltex \igopts{width=426.791339pt}?><graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/15/1161/2018/bg-15-1161-2018-f06.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4" sec-type="conclusions">
  <title>Discussion</title>
      <p id="d1e1923">A desert is a multi-stressed environment, generally characterized by a series
of stressors (Xie et al., 2007; Powell et al., 2015). The biocrust moss,
<italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> Hedw. generally acts as a pioneer, and even dominant
species, inhabiting many desert ecosystems due to its high resistance and
versatile adaptation strategies to stressors (Li et al., 2014; Weber et al.,
2016). There is growing evidence that biocrust organisms, including mosses,
are extremely vulnerable to stressors originating mostly from climate change
and disturbances (Reed et al., 2012; Weber et al., 2016). Ferrenberg
et al. (2015) found that climate change and physical disturbances may cause
similar community shifts within biocrusts. In arid sandy desert ecosystems,
drought and sand burial are the two prevailing stressors and are induced
separately by climate change and disturbance. They act as filters,
eliminating the sensitive species by determining the physiology, growth, and
survival of biocrust mosses (Martínez and Maun, 1999; Barker et al.,
2005; Jia et al., 2008). In this study, we found that drought and sand burial
exerted different, but dual effects on the physiology and growth of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic>. More interestingly, both antagonistic and additive
effects of drought and sand burial on <italic>B. argenteum</italic> were observed
(Fig. 6), which explained the survival and distribution of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> in an arid sandy desert where the two stressors can
occur simultaneously.</p>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Mutually antagonistic effects between drought and sand burial enable \textit{B.~argenteum} to survive the co-occurrence of the two stressors in an arid sandy desert}?><title>Mutually antagonistic effects between drought and sand burial enable <italic>B. argenteum</italic> to survive the co-occurrence of the two stressors in an arid sandy desert</title>
      <p id="d1e1947">As hypothesized, it was found that a combination of sand burial and drought
did not always exacerbate the individual negative effects of each stressor on
<italic>B. argenteum</italic>. Drought significantly ameliorated the negative effects
of deep-sand burial on PSII photochemical efficiency (Fig. 2), the retention
of chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content (Fig. 3), and regeneration potential (Fig. 4) of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic>. Sand burial diminished and even reversed the negative
effects of drought on the maintenance of the chlorophyll <inline-formula><mml:math id="M141" display="inline"><mml:mi>a</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> content
(Fig. 2), PSII photochemical efficiency (Fig. 3), and regeneration potential
(Fig. 4) of <italic>B. argenteum</italic>. These mutually antagonistic effects on the
physiological vigor of the biocrust moss provided an opportunity for it to
overcome the two co-occurring stressors, and this may be an important reason
why it usually acts as the pioneer moss species by colonizing and even
flourishing on the ground surface throughout China's sandy deserts.</p>
      <p id="d1e1973">The antagonistic effects of these two stressors are short-term physiological
indicators, implying that <italic>B. argenteum</italic> has a strong potential to
photosynthesize or regenerate after their removal. It is difficult for the
moss to maintain this potential for a long time due to the increased use or
exhaustion of its stored carbohydrate reserves when buried (Maun, 1998; Kent
et al., 2005). Therefore, other long-term parameters (e.g., growth rate) also
need to be considered.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Additive negative effects between drought and sand burial limit the distribution of \textit{B.~argenteum} in an arid sandy desert}?><title>Additive negative effects between drought and sand burial limit the distribution of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> in an arid sandy desert</title>
      <p id="d1e1989">In contrast to our expectations, the mutually antagonistic effects of drought
and sand burial did not impact on long-term shoot upgrowth, even though sand
burial (depth <inline-formula><mml:math id="M142" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>≤</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">mm</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>) stimulated shoot elongation (Fig. 5). This
additive negative effect inflicted by the combination of drought and sand
burial on shoot upgrowth suggested a trade-off between growth and stress
tolerance (Steinberg, 2012). In general, there is a trade-off between growth
and physiological vigor, including regeneration potential, when the moss is
exposed to stress. This is in accordance with the theory that adaptation to
stress carries a cost, and spending resources on defense or resistance leads
to a weakened performance in conditions where these traits are not needed
(Bijlsma and Loeschcke, 2005). Collectively, the preservation of
physiological activity (photosynthetic pigment, PSII photochemical
efficiency) and the propagation of fecundity (protonemal area), afforded by
the mutually antagonistic effects, at the cost of shoot elongation caused by
the negative additive effect, under long-term, deep-sand burial, will result
in the failure of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> shoots to protrude above the sand
surface. This could even lead to death, ultimately causing the moss to vanish
from the ecosystem. This can explain the absence of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> in
areas suffering from long-term, deep-sand burial stress, such as flowing sand
or seriously degraded landscapes. It also explains why <italic>B. argenteum</italic>
can colonize soil surfaces only after the burial depth decreases to a shallow
level, through ecological construction and restoration measures throughout
the arid sandy areas of northern China.</p>
      <p id="d1e2018">Based on a conceptual model, Bowker et al. (2006) and Li et al. (2010) both
proved that biocrust moss is restricted to a specific topography, where it is
less stressed by the microclimate and disturbances than at other positions on
micro-spatial scales. However, the distribution of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> is
apparently vaster and more continuous than that indicated by Bowker
et al. (2006) and Li et al. (2010) in arid sandy areas, where sand burial is
pervasive and occurs regularly. Thus, it is suggested that the interaction
between physical environmental stressors from resource limitation, climate,
and physical disturbances can be used to facilitate an extension of the
ecological niche of desert moss (Callaway, 1995). Therefore, corresponding
models should take into account the interactions between climate change and
physical disturbances, and from an evolutionary perspective the environmental
pressure and biological response should be considered integratively. This
study also found that biocrust moss could be harmed by climate change, with
conditions such as drought predicted to be more frequent and extensive in the
future. This damage may be alleviated by other environmental factors or
disturbances, such as sand burial, although this needs to be verified
further.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Possible mechanisms underlying the combined effects of drought and sand burial on \textit{B.~argenteum} and its significance in ecological construction}?><title>Possible mechanisms underlying the combined effects of drought and sand burial on <italic>B. argenteum</italic> and its significance in ecological construction</title>
      <p id="d1e2034">It is not fully understood why drought and sand burial exert antagonistic
effects on the physiological activity and asexual propagating fecundity of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic>. It is possible that the antagonistic effect may
originate from the water-conserving effect of sand burial, which could
mitigate the negative effect of drought to some extent (Meng et al., 2011).
For over 300 years in China, sand burial has been widely used by farmers as
a useful moisture-conserving measure to cultivate crops, in a practice
referred to as Shatian or sandy field (Li et al., 2000). However, this
beneficial effect has rarely been reported for biocrust mosses. In addition,
sand burial can also provide a protective shell for <italic>B. argenteum</italic>,
mitigating the damage from other stresses, such as wind (Liu et al., 2013).
On the other hand, drought favors <italic>B. argenteum</italic> under sand burial by
lowering the risk of carbon starvation induced by the reduction in
photosynthetic area and the relatively trivial rainfall (causing the partial
hydration of moss). This favorable effect of drought has also been reported
for bundled filamentous cyanobacteria following sand burial (Williams, 2011;
Rao et al., 2012) or thermal stress (Lan et al., 2014) and for mosses exposed
to heat shock (Xu et al., 2009), ultraviolet-B (Turnbull et al., 2009), and
fungal attack (Weber et al., 2016). Drought would increase the removal rate
of sand by enabling the dry sand to be more easily blown by wind, resulting
in a harmful deep burial becoming a beneficial shallow burial. Therefore,
drought is also considered to have a dual effect, especially when deep-sand
burial occurs.</p>
      <p id="d1e2046">The ability to achieve a higher rate of shoot elongation gives
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> an important advantage over other moss species,
enabling it to rapidly recover from sand burial (Jia et al., 2008). However,
shoot elongation in <italic>B. argenteum</italic> is severely inhibited by drought,
due to the lower amounts (Jia et al., 2008) and/or shorter durations (Kidron
et al., 2010) of moisture availability. This could be interpreted as
a reduction in the accumulation of carbohydrate gained by photosynthesis or
as carbon starvation (Barker et al., 2005) caused by drought. Sand burial not
only directly reduces the photosynthetic area of mosses but also causes
a deterioration in the environmental conditions required for photosynthesis
(e.g., the reduction in photosynthetically active radiation and blocking gas
exchange). Furthermore, the sand deposited on <italic>B. argenteum</italic> would
intercept water from precipitation, decreasing the quantity of rainfall
available to the moss, with the trivial amount of precipitation received
already identified as being detrimental (inducing carbon starvation) to
biocrust moss (Alpert and Oechel, 1985; Belnap et al., 2004). This would
consolidate the negative effect of drought on the shoot elongation of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic>.</p>
      <p id="d1e2061">In recent years, the rapid artificial cultivation of biocrust has provided
a novel alternative to traditional biological methods for controlling erosion
(Bu et al., 2014; Doherty et al., 2015; Antoninka et al., 2016). At the same
time, biocrust moss is considered to be a potentially promising biological
material that could be inoculated to accelerate the process of sand fixation
and the recovery of degraded soil (Antoninka et al., 2016). However, this
technique is still limited to laboratory trials, with no successful
large-scale application in the field reported. One key reason for this is
that the moss typically occupies the late successional stage among biocrusts
and its environmental requirements are high. The moss cultured in the
laboratory under favorable conditions cannot withstand the unfavorable stress
from drought, high temperature, and UV-B exposure. However, the results of
this study indicate that moderate sand burial may have the potential to
alleviate these stresses and increase the survival ratio of artificially
cultured biocrust moss in the restoration of arid sandy deserts or degraded
ecosystems. The use of such a technique is also in agreement with Maestre
et al. (2006), who found that the inoculation of biocrusts in the form of
slurry combined with the addition of composted sewage sludge, which has
a similar effect to that of burial, encouraged the recovery of biocrust in
degraded soils from semiarid Mediterranean areas.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <?xmltex \opttitle{Seasonal effects on the combined effects of drought and sand burial on \textit{B.~argenteum}}?><title>Seasonal effects on the combined effects of drought and sand burial on <italic>B. argenteum</italic></title>
      <p id="d1e2074">Coverage (Table 1), physiological vigor (Figs. 2 and 3), and growth rate
(Fig. 4) of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> and the response to drought and sand burial
varied with season (Fig. 5). In our study area, the physiological activity of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> reached its lowest level after a long-term cold and
drought stress in winter (Li et al., 2012). Conserving its activity in the
continuous drought of spring enabled the moss to be ready to obtain more
carbon through photosynthesis in the relatively favorable conditions in
summer (higher precipitation). In autumn, when the physiological activity of
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> was highest, it is essential to gain height through
shoot upgrowth to cope with the following sand burial in winter. This
successful seasonal adaptation strategy of <italic>B. argenteum</italic> to the
co-occurring stressors of drought and sand burial was supported by our
results. Therefore, the seasonal distribution of precipitation and sand
burial in our study area was important because it enabled
<italic>B. argenteum</italic> to be the pioneer species in our study area, and this
mechanism may be valid in areas suffering from the co-occurring stressors of
drought and sand burial in sandy deserts elsewhere in China and worldwide.</p>
</sec>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="dataavailability">

      <p id="d1e2098">No data sets were used in this article.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests">

      <p id="d1e2104">The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="sistatement">

      <p id="d1e2110">This article is part of the special issue “Biological soil crusts and their role in biogeochemical processes and
cycling”. It is a result of the BIOCRUST3 conference, Moab, USA, 26 to 30 September 2016.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d1e2116">We gratefully acknowledge Bettina Weber, David Elliott, and one anonymous
reviewer for their invaluable comments on the manuscript. This research was
partially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (grant nos.
41371099, 41671210, 41621001) and CAS “Light of West China” Program.<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?><?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Edited by: Bettina Weber<?xmltex \hack{\newline}?>
Reviewed by: David Elliott and one anonymous referee</p></ack><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Alpert, P. and Oechel, W. C.: Carbon balance limits microdistribution in the desiccation-tolerant plant, <italic>Grimmia laevigata</italic>, Ecology, 66, 660–669, 1985.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation> Antoninka, A., Bowker, M. A., Reed, S. C., and Doherty, K.: Production of greenhouse-grown biocrust mosses and associated
cyanobacteria to rehabilitate dryland soil function, Restor. Ecol., 24, 324–35,
2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation> Barker, D. H., Stark, L. R., Zimpfer, J. F., Mcletchie, N. D., and Smith, S. D.: Evidence of drought-induced stress on
biotic crust moss in the Mojave Desert, Plant Cell Environ., 28, 939–947, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation> Belnap, J. and Gillette, D. A.: Vulnerability of desert biological soil crusts to wind erosion: the influences of crust
development, soil texture, and disturbance. J. Arid Environ., 39, 133–142, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>Belnap, J., Phillips, S. L., and Miller, M. E.: Response of desert biological soil crusts to alterations in precipitation
frequency, Oecologia, 141, 306–316, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1438-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00442-003-1438-6</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation> Bijlsma, R. and Loeschcke, V.: Environmental stress, adaptation and evolution: an overview, J. Evol. Biol., 18, 744–749,
2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation> Bowker, M. A., Belnap, J., Davidson, D. W., and Goldstein, H.: Correlates of biological soil crust abundance across
a continuum of spatial scales: support for a hierarchical conceptual model, J. Appl. Ecol., 43, 152–163, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Bu, C., Wu, S., Yang, Y., and Zheng, M.: Identification of factors
influencing the restoration of cyanobacteria-dominated biological soil
crusts, PLoS ONE, 9, e90049, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090049" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1371/journal.pone.0090049</ext-link>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation> Callaway, R. M.: Positive interactions among plants, Bot. Rev., 61, 306–349, 1995.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation> Doherty, K. D., Antoninka, A. J., Bowker, M. A., Ayuso, S. V., and Johnson, N. C.: A novel approach to cultivate biocrusts
for restoration and experimentation, Ecol. Restor., 33, 13–16, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation> Ferrenberg, S., Reed, S. C., and Belnap, J.: Climate change and physical disturbance cause similar community shifts in
biological soil crusts, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 112, 12116–12121, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation> Garcia-Pichel, F. and Belnap, J.: Microenvironments and microscale productivity of cyanobacterial desert crusts, J. Phycol.,
32, 774–782, 1996.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation> Gilmore, A. M. and Yamamoto, H. Y.: Resolution of lutein and zeaxanthin using a non-endcapped, lightly carbon-loaded C-18
high-performance liquid chromatographic column, J. Chromatogr., 35, 137–145, 1991.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Huxman, T. E., Snyder, K. A., Tissue, D. Leffler, A. J., Ogle, K., Pockman, W. T., Sandquist, D. R., Potts, D. L., and
Schwinning, S.: Precipitation pulses and carbon fluxes in semiarid and arid ecosystems, Oecologia, 141, 254–268,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-004-1682-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00442-004-1682-4</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation> IPCC: Climate Change: the Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation> Jia, R. L., Li, X. R., Liu, L. C., Gao, Y. H., and Li, X. J.: Responses of biological soil crusts to sand burial in
a revegetated area of the Tengger Desert, Northern China, Soil Biol. Biochem., 40, 2827–2834, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation> Jia, R. L., Li, X. R., Liu, L. C., Gao, Y. H., and Li, X. T.: Differential wind tolerance of soil crust mosses explains
their micro-distribution in nature, Soil Biol. Biochem., 45, 31–39, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Kent, M., Owen, N. W., and Dale, M. P.: Photosynthetic responses of plant communities to sand burial on the machair dune
systems of the Outer Hebrides, Scotland, Ann. Bot.-London, 95, 869–877, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci093" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/aob/mci093</ext-link>, 2005.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation> Kidron, G. J., Vonshak, A., and Abeliovich, A.: Microbiotic crusts as biomarkers for surface stability and wetness
duration in the Negev Desert, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 34, 1594–1604, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Lan, S. B., Wu, L., Zhang, D. L., and Hu, C. X.: Desiccation provides photosynthetic protection for crust cyanobacteria
<italic>Microcoleus vaginatus</italic> from high temperature, Physiol. Plantarum, 152, 345–354, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12176" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/ppl.12176</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>Li, J. H., Li, X. R., and Zhang, P.: Micro-morphology, ultrastructure and chemical composition changes of <italic>Bryum argenteum</italic> from a desert biological soil crust following one-year desiccation, Bryologist, 117, 232–240, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R.: Eco-Hydrology of Biological Soil Crusts in Desert Region of China, Higher Education Press, Beijing, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. Y., Gong, J. D., Gao, Q. Z., and Wei, X. H.: Rainfall interception loss by pebble mulch in the semiarid region of
China, J. Hydrol., 228, 165–173, 2000.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R., Xiao, H. L., Zhang, J. G., and Wang, X. P.: Long-term ecosystem effects of sand-binding vegetation in the
Tengger Desert, northern China, Restor. Ecol., 12, 376–390, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R., He, M. Z., Zerbe, S., Li, X. J., and Liu, L. C.: Micro-geomorphology determines community structure of
biological soil crusts at small scales, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 35, 932–940, 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R., Zhang, P., Su, Y. G., and Jia, R. L.: Carbon fixation by biological soil crusts following revegetation of sand
dunes in arid desert regions of China: A four-year field study, Catena, 97, 119–26, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Liu, B., Liu, Z. M., Lü, X. T., Maestre, F. T., and Wang, L. X.: Sand burial compensates for the negative effects of
erosion on the dune-building shrub <italic>Artemisia wudanica</italic>, Plant Soil, 374, 263–273, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1866-y" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-013-1866-y</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation> Maestre, F. T., Martín, N., Díez, B., López-Poma, R., Santos, F., Luque, I., and Cortina, J.: Watering,
fertilization, and slurry inoculation promote recovery of biological crust function in degraded soils, Microb. Ecol., 52, 365–377,
2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation> Martínez, M. L. and Maun, M. A.: Responses of dune mosses to experimental burial by sand under natural and greenhouse
conditions, Plant Ecol., 145, 209–219, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation> Maun, M. A.: Adaptations of plants to burial in coastal sand dune systems, Can. J. Bot., 7, 713–738, 1998.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation> Maun, M. A.: Burial of plants as a selective force in sand dunes, in: Coastal Dunes: Ecology and Management, edited by:
Martinez, M. L., Psuty, N. P., Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 119–136, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation> Meng, J., Bu, C. F., Zhang, X. C., and Sun, Z. F.: Effects of biological crust removal and sand mulching on soil
evaporation in a sandy soil, Bull. Soil Water Conserv., 31, 58–62, 2011 (in Chinese
with English abstract).</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation> Powell, J. T., Chatziefthimiou, A. D., Banack, S. A., Cox, P. A., and Metcalf, J. S.: Desert crust microorganisms,
their environment, and human health, J. Arid Environ., 112, 127–133, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation> Rao, B. Q., Liu, Y. D., Lan, S. B., Wu, P. P., Wang, W. B., and Li, D. H.: Effects of sand burial stress on the early
developments of cyanobacterial crusts in the field, Eur. J. Soil Biol., 48, 48–55, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation> Reed, S. C., Coe, K. K., Sparks, J. P., Housman, D. C., Zelikova, T. J., and Belnap, J.: Changes to dryland rainfall
result in rapid moss mortality and altered soil fertility, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 752–755, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation> Smith, M. D.: An ecological perspective on extreme climatic events: a synthetic definition and framework to guide future
research, J. Ecol., 99, 656–663, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Stark, L. R., Nichols, L., McLetchie, D. N., Smith, S. D., and Zundel, C.: Age and sex specific rates of leaf regeneration
in the Mojave Desert moss <italic>Syntrichia caninervis</italic>, Am. J. Bot., 91, 1–9, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Steinberg, C. E. W.: Stress Ecology: Environmental Stress as Ecological Driving Force and Key Player in Evolution,
<ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2072-5" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-94-007-2072-5</ext-link>, Springer, Berlin, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation> Turnbull, J. D., Leslie, S. J., and Robinson, S. A.: Desiccation protects Antarctic mosses from ultraviolet-B induced DNA
damage, Funct. Plant Biol., 36, 214–221, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Weber, B., Büdel, B., and Belnap, J. (Eds.): Biological soil crusts: an organizing principle in drylands, in:
Ecological Studies, vol. 226, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30214-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-3-319-30214-0</ext-link>, Springer, Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation> Whitford, W. G.: Ecology of Desert Systems, Academic Press, London, 2002.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation> Williams, W. J. and Eldridge, D. J.: Deposition of sand over a cyanobacterial soil crust increases nitrogen bioavailability
in a semi-arid woodland, Appl. Soil Ecol., 49, 26–31, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation> Xie, Z., Liu, Y., Hu, C., Chen, L., and Li, D.: Relationships between the biomass of algal crusts in fields and their
compressive strength, Soil Biol. Biochem., 39, 567–572, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Xu, S. J., Liu, C. J., Jiang, P. A., Cai, W. M., and Wang, Y.: The effects of drying following heat shock exposure of the
desert moss <italic>Syntrichia caninervis</italic>, Sci. Total Environ., 407, 2411–2419, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref><?xmltex \hack{\newpage}?>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation> Zhang, Y. M., Wu, N., Zhang, B. C., and Zhang, J.: Species composition, distribution patterns and ecological functions of
biological soil crusts in the Gurbantunggut Desert, J. Arid Land, 2, 180–189,   2010.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list><app-group content-type="float"><app><title/>

    </app></app-group></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Antagonistic effects of drought and sand burial enable the survival of the biocrust moss <i>Bryum argenteum</i> in an arid sandy desert</article-title-html>
<abstract-html><p class="p">Biocrust moss is an essential soil surface bio-cover. It can represent the
latest succession stage among the diverse range of surface-dwelling
cryptogams (e.g., cyanobacteria, green algae, and lichen, which are also
referred to as biocrusts), and it can make a major contribution to soil
stability and fertility in many arid sandy desert ecosystems. The soil
surface represents a very large ecological niche that is poikilohydric in
nature. Biocrust moss is therefore highly susceptible to drought and sand
burial, which are two ubiquitous stressors in arid sandy deserts. However,
little information is available regarding the mechanism by which biocrust
moss can survive and flourish in these habitats when stressed simultaneously
by the two stressors. The combined effects of drought and sand burial were
evaluated in a field experiment using the predominant biocrust moss,
<i>Bryum argenteum</i> Hedw., in the Tengger Desert, China. Drought was
simulated by applying distilled water in three artificial rainfall regimes at
8-day intervals in spring and autumn: 4 and 6 mm (average rainfall,
control), 2 and 3 mm (double drought), and 1 and 1.5 mm
(4-fold drought), respectively. The effect of sand burial was determined by
applying six treatments, i.e., sand depths of 0 (control), 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and
10 mm. The four parameters of chlorophyll <i>a</i> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, regeneration potential, and shoot upgrowth were
evaluated in the moss. It was found that the combined effects of drought and
sand burial did not exacerbate the single negative effects of the four
parameters tested. Drought significantly ameliorated the negative effects of
deep-sand burial on the retention of chlorophyll <i>a</i> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, and the regeneration potential of
<i>B. argenteum</i>. Sand burial diminished and even reversed the negative
effects of drought on the maintenance of chlorophyll <i>a</i> content, PSII
photochemical efficiency, and regeneration potential. Although drought and
sand burial imposed an additive negative effect on shoot upgrowth, which
suggested a trade-off between growth ability and stress tolerance, their
mutually antagonistic effect on the physiological vigor of
<i>B. argenteum</i> provided an opportunity for the biocrust moss to
overcome the two co-occurring stressors. In addition to providing a strong
stress tolerance, drought and sand burial may provide an important mechanism
for the biodiversity maintenance of biocrust mosses in arid sandy ecosystems.</p></abstract-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation> Alpert, P. and Oechel, W. C.: Carbon balance limits microdistribution in the desiccation-tolerant plant, <i>Grimmia
laevigata</i>, Ecology, 66, 660–669, 1985.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation> Antoninka, A., Bowker, M. A., Reed, S. C., and Doherty, K.: Production of greenhouse-grown biocrust mosses and associated
cyanobacteria to rehabilitate dryland soil function, Restor. Ecol., 24, 324–35,
2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation> Barker, D. H., Stark, L. R., Zimpfer, J. F., Mcletchie, N. D., and Smith, S. D.: Evidence of drought-induced stress on
biotic crust moss in the Mojave Desert, Plant Cell Environ., 28, 939–947, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation> Belnap, J. and Gillette, D. A.: Vulnerability of desert biological soil crusts to wind erosion: the influences of crust
development, soil texture, and disturbance. J. Arid Environ., 39, 133–142, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation> Belnap, J., Phillips, S. L., and Miller, M. E.: Response of desert biological soil crusts to alterations in precipitation
frequency, Oecologia, 141, 306–316, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1438-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-003-1438-6</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation> Bijlsma, R. and Loeschcke, V.: Environmental stress, adaptation and evolution: an overview, J. Evol. Biol., 18, 744–749,
2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation> Bowker, M. A., Belnap, J., Davidson, D. W., and Goldstein, H.: Correlates of biological soil crust abundance across
a continuum of spatial scales: support for a hierarchical conceptual model, J. Appl. Ecol., 43, 152–163, 2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
Bu, C., Wu, S., Yang, Y., and Zheng, M.: Identification of factors
influencing the restoration of cyanobacteria-dominated biological soil
crusts, PLoS ONE, 9, e90049, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090049" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090049</a>, 2014.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation> Callaway, R. M.: Positive interactions among plants, Bot. Rev., 61, 306–349, 1995.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation> Doherty, K. D., Antoninka, A. J., Bowker, M. A., Ayuso, S. V., and Johnson, N. C.: A novel approach to cultivate biocrusts
for restoration and experimentation, Ecol. Restor., 33, 13–16, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation> Ferrenberg, S., Reed, S. C., and Belnap, J.: Climate change and physical disturbance cause similar community shifts in
biological soil crusts, P. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 112, 12116–12121, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation> Garcia-Pichel, F. and Belnap, J.: Microenvironments and microscale productivity of cyanobacterial desert crusts, J. Phycol.,
32, 774–782, 1996.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation> Gilmore, A. M. and Yamamoto, H. Y.: Resolution of lutein and zeaxanthin using a non-endcapped, lightly carbon-loaded C-18
high-performance liquid chromatographic column, J. Chromatogr., 35, 137–145, 1991.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation> Huxman, T. E., Snyder, K. A., Tissue, D. Leffler, A. J., Ogle, K., Pockman, W. T., Sandquist, D. R., Potts, D. L., and
Schwinning, S.: Precipitation pulses and carbon fluxes in semiarid and arid ecosystems, Oecologia, 141, 254–268,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-004-1682-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-004-1682-4</a>, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation> IPCC: Climate Change: the Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation> Jia, R. L., Li, X. R., Liu, L. C., Gao, Y. H., and Li, X. J.: Responses of biological soil crusts to sand burial in
a revegetated area of the Tengger Desert, Northern China, Soil Biol. Biochem., 40, 2827–2834, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation> Jia, R. L., Li, X. R., Liu, L. C., Gao, Y. H., and Li, X. T.: Differential wind tolerance of soil crust mosses explains
their micro-distribution in nature, Soil Biol. Biochem., 45, 31–39, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation> Kent, M., Owen, N. W., and Dale, M. P.: Photosynthetic responses of plant communities to sand burial on the machair dune
systems of the Outer Hebrides, Scotland, Ann. Bot.-London, 95, 869–877, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci093" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mci093</a>, 2005.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation> Kidron, G. J., Vonshak, A., and Abeliovich, A.: Microbiotic crusts as biomarkers for surface stability and wetness
duration in the Negev Desert, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 34, 1594–1604, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation> Lan, S. B., Wu, L., Zhang, D. L., and Hu, C. X.: Desiccation provides photosynthetic protection for crust cyanobacteria
<i>Microcoleus vaginatus</i> from high temperature, Physiol. Plantarum, 152, 345–354, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12176" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12176</a>, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation> Li, J. H., Li, X. R., and Zhang, P.: Micro-morphology, ultrastructure and chemical composition changes of <i>Bryum
argenteum</i> from a desert biological soil crust following one-year desiccation, Bryologist, 117, 232–240, 2014.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R.: Eco-Hydrology of Biological Soil Crusts in Desert Region of China, Higher Education Press, Beijing, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. Y., Gong, J. D., Gao, Q. Z., and Wei, X. H.: Rainfall interception loss by pebble mulch in the semiarid region of
China, J. Hydrol., 228, 165–173, 2000.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R., Xiao, H. L., Zhang, J. G., and Wang, X. P.: Long-term ecosystem effects of sand-binding vegetation in the
Tengger Desert, northern China, Restor. Ecol., 12, 376–390, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R., He, M. Z., Zerbe, S., Li, X. J., and Liu, L. C.: Micro-geomorphology determines community structure of
biological soil crusts at small scales, Earth Surf. Proc. Land., 35, 932–940, 2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation> Li, X. R., Zhang, P., Su, Y. G., and Jia, R. L.: Carbon fixation by biological soil crusts following revegetation of sand
dunes in arid desert regions of China: A four-year field study, Catena, 97, 119–26, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation> Liu, B., Liu, Z. M., Lü, X. T., Maestre, F. T., and Wang, L. X.: Sand burial compensates for the negative effects of
erosion on the dune-building shrub <i>Artemisia wudanica</i>, Plant Soil, 374, 263–273, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1866-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-013-1866-y</a>, 2013.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation> Maestre, F. T., Martín, N., Díez, B., López-Poma, R., Santos, F., Luque, I., and Cortina, J.: Watering,
fertilization, and slurry inoculation promote recovery of biological crust function in degraded soils, Microb. Ecol., 52, 365–377,
2006.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation> Martínez, M. L. and Maun, M. A.: Responses of dune mosses to experimental burial by sand under natural and greenhouse
conditions, Plant Ecol., 145, 209–219, 1999.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation> Maun, M. A.: Adaptations of plants to burial in coastal sand dune systems, Can. J. Bot., 7, 713–738, 1998.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation> Maun, M. A.: Burial of plants as a selective force in sand dunes, in: Coastal Dunes: Ecology and Management, edited by:
Martinez, M. L., Psuty, N. P., Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, 119–136, 2008.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation> Meng, J., Bu, C. F., Zhang, X. C., and Sun, Z. F.: Effects of biological crust removal and sand mulching on soil
evaporation in a sandy soil, Bull. Soil Water Conserv., 31, 58–62, 2011 (in Chinese
with English abstract).
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation> Powell, J. T., Chatziefthimiou, A. D., Banack, S. A., Cox, P. A., and Metcalf, J. S.: Desert crust microorganisms,
their environment, and human health, J. Arid Environ., 112, 127–133, 2015.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation> Rao, B. Q., Liu, Y. D., Lan, S. B., Wu, P. P., Wang, W. B., and Li, D. H.: Effects of sand burial stress on the early
developments of cyanobacterial crusts in the field, Eur. J. Soil Biol., 48, 48–55, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation> Reed, S. C., Coe, K. K., Sparks, J. P., Housman, D. C., Zelikova, T. J., and Belnap, J.: Changes to dryland rainfall
result in rapid moss mortality and altered soil fertility, Nat. Clim. Change, 2, 752–755, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation> Smith, M. D.: An ecological perspective on extreme climatic events: a synthetic definition and framework to guide future
research, J. Ecol., 99, 656–663, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation> Stark, L. R., Nichols, L., McLetchie, D. N., Smith, S. D., and Zundel, C.: Age and sex specific rates of leaf regeneration
in the Mojave Desert moss <i>Syntrichia caninervis</i>, Am. J. Bot., 91, 1–9, 2004.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation> Steinberg, C. E. W.: Stress Ecology: Environmental Stress as Ecological Driving Force and Key Player in Evolution,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2072-5" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2072-5</a>, Springer, Berlin, 2012.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation> Turnbull, J. D., Leslie, S. J., and Robinson, S. A.: Desiccation protects Antarctic mosses from ultraviolet-B induced DNA
damage, Funct. Plant Biol., 36, 214–221, 2009.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation> Weber, B., Büdel, B., and Belnap, J. (Eds.): Biological soil crusts: an organizing principle in drylands, in:
Ecological Studies, vol. 226, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30214-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-30214-0</a>, Springer, Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, 2016.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation> Whitford, W. G.: Ecology of Desert Systems, Academic Press, London, 2002.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation> Williams, W. J. and Eldridge, D. J.: Deposition of sand over a cyanobacterial soil crust increases nitrogen bioavailability
in a semi-arid woodland, Appl. Soil Ecol., 49, 26–31, 2011.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation> Xie, Z., Liu, Y., Hu, C., Chen, L., and Li, D.: Relationships between the biomass of algal crusts in fields and their
compressive strength, Soil Biol. Biochem., 39, 567–572, 2007.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation> Xu, S. J., Liu, C. J., Jiang, P. A., Cai, W. M., and Wang, Y.: The effects of drying following heat shock exposure of the
desert moss <i>Syntrichia caninervis</i>, Sci. Total Environ., 407, 2411–2419, 2009.

</mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation> Zhang, Y. M., Wu, N., Zhang, B. C., and Zhang, J.: Species composition, distribution patterns and ecological functions of
biological soil crusts in the Gurbantunggut Desert, J. Arid Land, 2, 180–189,   2010.
</mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
